we know

Friday, 2 December 2016

"... rocks, in contrast to our thoughts of rocks, surely do exist outside of thought, a fact that alone explains Alison’s stumbling on this rock along a road in Vermont without first thinking it into existence." From: Johnson D. K. & Silliman M. R. (2009) Bridges to the world. Sense, Rotterdam, page 8.

A Radical Constructivist, after stumbling says:

"... SOMETHING, in contrast to our thoughts of SOMETHING, surely DOES exist outside of thought, a fact that alone explains Alison’s stumbling on SOMETHING along a road in Vermont without first thinking it into existence ....

... BUT TO THINK SOMETHING AS 'STUMBLING' AND SOMETHING AS A 'ROCK' REQUIRES MY OWN MENTAL CONSTRUCTION OF IT AS 'STUMBLING' AND AS A 'ROCK' ..."

Tuesday, 6 January 2015

Knowledge and Goodness

In short: it is GOODNESS that enables us to KNOW!

"I mean, do you think there's any advantage in owning everything in
the world except good things, or in understanding everything else except
goodness, and therefore failing to understand anything worthwhile and
good?"

"So the sun is not to be identified with sight, but is responsible for sight and is itself within the visible realm. Right?
"Yes" he said.
"The sun is the child of goodness I was talking about, then" I said. "It is a counterpart to its father, goodness. As goodness stands in the intelligible realm to intelligence and the
things we know, so in the visible realm the sun stands to sight and the
things we see."

Sunday, 13 October 2013

In one famous article dating from 1988 (German edition 1998), Maturana
states that the problem of reality is “the
most important problem of our time”. I fully agree with him and I think that realism needs to be expressively refuted and the choice between
realism and constructivism cannot be considered “a matter of taste”, an attitude which in my view prevents to make progress in solving the
problem of reality in a more viable way.

In the constructivist thesis that “reality is the construction of an observer”
and in the realist thesis that “reality
exists independently”, the term reality is merely a homonym, means two
different things! Hence the common attitude to mention them, as if they would
mean the same, is very confusing!

For me as a constructivist, the reality that I construct is not
a physical reality but a conceptual one.

For a realist, on the contrary, the
reality that he sees as existing independently is actually a combination of the
two: physical reality as the “reference” and conceptual reality as its “copy”
in his head.

In constructivism we need to disentangle these two things, and
here is where Maturana’s reflections about autopoiesis and cognition become
essential.

Consider for example his differentiation between two fundamental
ways in which we, as humans, can understand explanations; he distinguishes two
mutually exclusive explanatory paths: the path of ‘objectivity without
parentheses’ and the path of ‘objectivity with parentheses’ (Maturana 1988:28ff)

On the explanatory path of objectivity without parentheses, the observer
assumes either implicitly or explicitly that he is capable of making statements
about the logic of things, as if the logic he accords to them would exist
independently of him. He does not ask himself: “How can I say that the logic of
this thing exists independently of me?” If someone makes the implicit
assumption that he can reference things, as if the logic he accords to them
exists independently of him, then he is also effectively stating that the
explanations he applies can ultimately be validated by the things themselves, independently
of him. This explanatory path therefore contains the implicit and unaware
assumption that an individual can reference a logic which exists independently
of him and which validates what he says. And what could that be? It is a logic
of reality (the logic of being, the essence of things etc.) or in other words a
universal truth. It is universal because it exists independently of us. It is
valid for everything because it is independent from everything.

On the explanatory path of objectivity with
parentheses, the observer notes something different, something very
interesting: that his explanations are validated by his actions. The logic of
his experience is explained by the logic of his other experiences and not by a
reference to a logic which is independent of us. The observer sees himself as a
source of validation for his own statements. This is the essence of the essence
of constructivism! And it is highly relevant for understanding our responsibility for what we know.References:

Tuesday, 18 December 2012

"I believe that to meet the challenge of our times, human beings will
have to develop a greater sense of universal responsibility. Each of us
must learn to work not just for his or her own self, family or nation,
but for the benefit of all mankind. Universal responsibility is the real
key to human survival. It is the best foundation for world peace, the
equitable use of natural resources, and through concern for future
generations, the proper care of the environment." The XIVth Dalai Lama, more ...

Welcome ...

... come in, take a seat and make yourself comfortable ...This place is devoted to one simple idea: that we should revise our views on responsibility for what we know.Not an Absolute Mind outside ourselves (Anaxagoras), nor alone the individual minds inside each of us are responsible for the results and tools of our rational thinking.Responsibility for what we know arises in a social, interactive process of negotiation of meaning as a continuous interaction between the individual and others (social constraints): a productive process in which WHAT WE KNOW “is at once both historical and dynamic, contextual and unique” (Wenger 1998).

About Me (the near side ...)

I usually strive for equilibrium and balance, and try to look at people and things from different points of view or angles and to seek their value on different experiential levels, realistic but also imaginative, rational but also emotional.
Feelings, passionate beliefs and the aspiration to make the world better tend to prevail in my attitude - as with the type of a "dreamy idealist" - so that I frequently have to work hard for keeping my feet on the ground, and staying in touch with the mundane demands of everyday life.
Although I am not religious in a tradional sense, I feel a deep attachment to an inner voice and to mystical experiences which support me and let me hope in my search for beauty, kindness, compassion, solidarity and love.